We read Ceglia and colleagues' meta-analysis (1) on the efficacy and safety of inhaled insulin with great interest. Their analysis provides a valuable appraisal of this new form of insulin delivery. It is 1 of very few studies of inhaled insulin that have not sponsored by the manufacturer, and therefore it is less likely to be associated with bias. However, we disagree with the authors' reasoning for not collecting data on fasting or postprandial glucose values because they “were self-reported and therefore were less reliable than hemoglobin A1c levels” (1). In fact, at least 7 of the 16 trials included in the meta-analysis (2–8) obtained both fasting and postprandial plasma glucose values in the laboratory setting and considered these values to be secondary efficacy end points. Results from these trials were mixed: Some studies showed superior (3–5, 7, 8), whereas others reported similar (2, 6), effects of inhaled insulin in improving 1 or both glucose variables compared with the comparison groups. It would be interesting if Ceglia and colleagues would analyze the fasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels from all trials that reported these values to estimate the global effect. The postprandial plasma glucose values are particularly important because inhaled insulin has a short duration of action that is designed to control postprandial hyperglycemia.